Apparently.. But I'm more loved
[Video] ObsidianAnt: "So... about that mining 'nerf' - nerfed, misunderstood, or broken?"
- Thread starter StuartGT
- Start date
Yeah, this happens when you stay on the white knights side.Apparently.. But I'm more loved
When everything is good, there is nothing to complain and everyone "loves" you.
According to your logic above, where you brag about joining 4 months earlier than somebody else, you're still but a newbie compared to me.
I'm no huge fan of Duck's by any stretch, but your response is utterly devoid of merit.
Yeah, but still i know more about the markets and how they dont work, abot material garthering and how it used to work and it not work anymore than you =D
I'm the whitest knight there is, baby, riding on my war elephant!
After all, there are no bugs in Elite Dangerous, only dirty routers!
I think the VO nerf is a good thing. VO mining was so lucrative it put all other methods of credit earning in the shade. I'm sure Frontier were keeping internal stats on what activities people were doing to earn credits and have tried to level things out a bit.
I don't like how they've done it, though. It appears that the game is reacting to the quantity of valuable materials in a players cargo hold before they've even sold it to the market. That's backwards.
In any market economy (and we're all well aware that the Elite Dangerous economy is a long way from any market economy) there are two things that dictate the price of something: supply and demand.
In the case of VOs, LTDs and similar it seems to me the supply was - and still is - way too high. I used to do a spot of mining in my Cobra and could find a VO hotspot and fill it up quite quickly. Anything that easy to get in such quantities should be priced accordingly - low.
IMO the correct thing to do would have been to nerf the frequency of VO cores to about 5-10% of current levels and then see what happens to the market. I'm sure it would have been a simpler change than what was done. Cut supply and leave prices as they were and then monitor player behaviour. Adjust as necessary.
As for the third party tools - they're still working like they always have. The problem is that the way prices work has changed and different players are getting different prices depending on what's in their cargo hold. It probably doesn't help that most players who use the tools aren't running the data collecting apps that keep prices updated. Anyone who visits between the last VO dump and the next player who updates the prices is going to get wrong data, and there's potentially quite a few of those.
I don't like how they've done it, though. It appears that the game is reacting to the quantity of valuable materials in a players cargo hold before they've even sold it to the market. That's backwards.
In any market economy (and we're all well aware that the Elite Dangerous economy is a long way from any market economy) there are two things that dictate the price of something: supply and demand.
In the case of VOs, LTDs and similar it seems to me the supply was - and still is - way too high. I used to do a spot of mining in my Cobra and could find a VO hotspot and fill it up quite quickly. Anything that easy to get in such quantities should be priced accordingly - low.
IMO the correct thing to do would have been to nerf the frequency of VO cores to about 5-10% of current levels and then see what happens to the market. I'm sure it would have been a simpler change than what was done. Cut supply and leave prices as they were and then monitor player behaviour. Adjust as necessary.
As for the third party tools - they're still working like they always have. The problem is that the way prices work has changed and different players are getting different prices depending on what's in their cargo hold. It probably doesn't help that most players who use the tools aren't running the data collecting apps that keep prices updated. Anyone who visits between the last VO dump and the next player who updates the prices is going to get wrong data, and there's potentially quite a few of those.
Oh, and the english helps alot too.I'm the whitest knight there is, baby, riding on my war elephant!
After all, there are no bugs in Elite Dangerous, only dirty routers!
Sometimes even i cant read what i have wrote, so i can imagine that most of people cant too.
How is the view from that peak of Dunning-Kruger?
This is something that you can know better than me, so i leave to you answer your own question.
I don't agree with reducing the amount of VOs you could obtain from a core. That wouldn't have really addressed other flooded markets, and really just cut down on the satisfaction of core mining, cracking open an asteroid to get just 2-3 opals.
Ehh, I'm guessing that all those "Make credits fast and easy" videos are still out there and haven't all been amended in regards to the update.
There are a few things that i found frustrating while reading through this thread (big surprise)
1) all of a sudden 3rd party tools are some plague on the game? get your head out of your Arx. 3rd party tools are the saving grace to this game. It is literally insane to me that there is a 1:1 scale replica of the galaxy, with tens of thousands of installations, and the only way to interact with it in game is through the system map. I would argue that the variety and popularity of 3rd party tools illustrates the vast gap in useful game UI.
2) Call the new mining update whatever you want; "price reduction", "market correction", etc. Regardless of the name, it is a de facto nerf to mining payout (whether you think that is good or not is irrelevant). As a general rule of games, nerfs are not fun
3) Realism/ the simulation is so selectively applied, it is meaningless. Some are saying that the demand mechanism makes the market volatility more realistic. Ok, sure. But the fact that there is a multi trillion dollar industry with NO structure whatsoever is about as unrealistic as it gets. if we wanted this to be remotely realistic, there would be 1000 companies bringing market analyzing software to mining CMDRs. There would also likely be large firms that would offer a flat price for the goods, and then sell to stations themselves. With this much money flying around, there would be endless possibilities. Currently we are in a state akin to an armored car driving bank to bank in an effort to find out who will give them the best price for gold.
4) Since I started playing the game, I never participated in the clear exploits that resulted in big payouts ( skimmer stacking, surface scanning +self destruct, etc). I was very excited when there was a legitimate option to make a good chunk of money
5) Stop with the "sidey to anaconda in an hour" arguments. It is irrelevant to any useful discussion. Ive never seen a rookie player go from legit noob to anaconda in a day. Sure you can mine enough for a conda in 1 or 2 runs depending on your cargo hold, but this is not possible for a new player. it will likely take them 30 hours just to sort out the flight mechanics and basics of the game.
6) it took me ~396 hours to earn a vette, since this is somehow part of the discussion.
1) all of a sudden 3rd party tools are some plague on the game? get your head out of your Arx. 3rd party tools are the saving grace to this game. It is literally insane to me that there is a 1:1 scale replica of the galaxy, with tens of thousands of installations, and the only way to interact with it in game is through the system map. I would argue that the variety and popularity of 3rd party tools illustrates the vast gap in useful game UI.
2) Call the new mining update whatever you want; "price reduction", "market correction", etc. Regardless of the name, it is a de facto nerf to mining payout (whether you think that is good or not is irrelevant). As a general rule of games, nerfs are not fun
3) Realism/ the simulation is so selectively applied, it is meaningless. Some are saying that the demand mechanism makes the market volatility more realistic. Ok, sure. But the fact that there is a multi trillion dollar industry with NO structure whatsoever is about as unrealistic as it gets. if we wanted this to be remotely realistic, there would be 1000 companies bringing market analyzing software to mining CMDRs. There would also likely be large firms that would offer a flat price for the goods, and then sell to stations themselves. With this much money flying around, there would be endless possibilities. Currently we are in a state akin to an armored car driving bank to bank in an effort to find out who will give them the best price for gold.
4) Since I started playing the game, I never participated in the clear exploits that resulted in big payouts ( skimmer stacking, surface scanning +self destruct, etc). I was very excited when there was a legitimate option to make a good chunk of money
5) Stop with the "sidey to anaconda in an hour" arguments. It is irrelevant to any useful discussion. Ive never seen a rookie player go from legit noob to anaconda in a day. Sure you can mine enough for a conda in 1 or 2 runs depending on your cargo hold, but this is not possible for a new player. it will likely take them 30 hours just to sort out the flight mechanics and basics of the game.
6) it took me ~396 hours to earn a vette, since this is somehow part of the discussion.
so well said ^^
I think this stands as the best point made in this thread.
(yes I read the whole thread, went really down hill after page 6)
"fast and easy" is the problem. If you want fast it should be hard. If you want easy, it should take longer. That is the logic behind most players defending the mining nerf.
-k
No, I think what needs to happen here is that you need to apply a little bit more of your brain, and appreciate that the point is about how different people define their targets.
You used a target of your own definition and also defined your own criteria for how to optimally approach that target. You then used that as though it was a single universal target and optimisation criteria which applied to everyone and based your criticism of others on that. You also made a complete jump from that to something in now way implied in order to level further criticism against others.
That is doing exactly the same thing as I illustrated in the analogy.
Of course an athlete trying to win a medal will work hard towards it. Because they aren't working to the same target and optimal path criteria as the person who just wants a gold medal. One wants to have a thing, the other wants to have earned it.
You might want to get your Corvette as quickly and with as little effort as possible. Meh, fine, you do you. But you don't get to define that as the universal target and criteria for everybody else though, and trying to do that and then using it as a means of judging and criticising how others are doing against their targets and criteria is where you are at fault.
Last edited:
Well, in my next game, if I ever do, I will try to do everything with one hand, and win only 100,000 per month, that will bring a new difficulty to the game that otherwise does not.
Man, if there is no more content when you have achieved everything, do not blame me, blame the developers, stretching the gum does not make it more fun.
I don't blame the players who have been playing for years and haven't got all the ships, but they could have do it sure, do you think we are all willing to play the same things for 5 or 6 years?
and I am a veteran as the one who has been playing for 5 years, at 3 months I was already the f+++ Han Solo
Last edited:
The really wrong part is telling other people how to enjoy the game.
From time to time i like to crack some asteroids, other times i enjoy the humming of mining lasers on a 60% painite rock, other times i like to transport vips
But most of the time i do many other things.
That's how my SLF pilot managed to rack a paycheck of 2.3bn credits while I got 26bn in assets. Do you think i finished the game?
nope, not at all.
I still hop in a non-engineered Eagle and go check wanted npcs in a nav beacon.
Or go assassination missions in a DBS armed with a pair of citos and a pair of dumbfires.
Or try to flip a system or enjoy whatever cg/ii happens (well, not anymore - they nerfed those too) or ...
The point is there are a lot of things to do in the game, even if one has 20, 40 or 100bn credits.
If you dont have them credits, it doesn't mean that nobody has to.
Some people like to play rich, while other like to roleplay the poor. Each to their own, none are wrong.
edit: typos
Last edited: